I really enjoyed the review session. It was my first time, and thought it helped. If we were going over a problem I knew, my ability to explain it actually helps me learn as well (if I can explain a concept, then I have that concept down) and if I didn't know a problem, the rest of the group was able to explain what I did wrong.

Also, for retakers like me whose weakest subject is RC, I have taken to reading articles from http://scicentral.com. These are very similar in length and content to the LSAT. There was 1 article today about a phenomenon of intersex crabs, the attempt to discover the reason for it, and the reason why 1 solution is improbable while another is possible but needs further evidence.

Thorcogan wrote:Also, for retakers like me whose weakest subject is RC, I have taken to reading articles from http://scicentral.com. These are very similar in length and content to the LSAT. There was 1 article today about a phenomenon of intersex crabs, the attempt to discover the reason for it, and the reason why 1 solution is improbable while another is possible but needs further evidence.

Following this line of conversation, is there a good source for law/economy/government types of articles? The art/culture/science ones I have down because of my background, but these other ones can get slightly confusing at times.

I took about 5 killer games today (Zephyr, Old/Used CDs, etc...) and they really discouraged me. Most of them took me more than 15 minutes I really hope the era of killer LGs are over. I wouldn't be able to handle one in December.

blackbirdfly wrote:I took about 5 killer games today (Zephyr, Old/Used CDs, etc...) and they really discouraged me. Most of them took me more than 15 minutes I really hope the era of killer LGs are over. I wouldn't be able to handle one in December.

Keep doing the killer games over and over until you figure out the best way to approach them and how you could/should have made key inferences. Without going into too much detail, some of these "killer" games have a vital inference or link of inferences that make or break your performance on the game. Everyone struggles with them initially, so don't get too discouraged. Also keep in mind that these tricky games are also usually coupled with 2 pretty easy games, so you might be heading into a killer game with 11 or so minutes on test day.

blackbirdfly wrote:I took about 5 killer games today (Zephyr, Old/Used CDs, etc...) and they really discouraged me. Most of them took me more than 15 minutes I really hope the era of killer LGs are over. I wouldn't be able to handle one in December.

Is there a specific type of game that was constantly tripping you up? Or just the hardest versions of each type of game. IMO I would rather have 3 easy games and 1 mauve Dinos than 4 games that are all relatively tough.

I think the best thing you could do is get to the point where you are breezing through games 1 and 2. At this point in LG I am finishing the 2 easiest games somewhere around 14 minutes, and then the 3rd game takes about 8-9 minutes, which leaves me around 12 min for the hardest game. At that pace it would take a truly brutal game to trip me up (keep in mind if there is 1 truly brutal game, chances are the first 3 were easier than normal, so I probably did them faster than normal.

TL;DR just like it is key to get though the first 10 LR in about 11 minutes, it's also key to get through the easy LG games quickly. Aiming for 8:30 per game is going to hurt you because the most difficult games will take longer.

blackbirdfly wrote:I took about 5 killer games today (Zephyr, Old/Used CDs, etc...) and they really discouraged me. Most of them took me more than 15 minutes I really hope the era of killer LGs are over. I wouldn't be able to handle one in December.

Is there a specific type of game that was constantly tripping you up? Or just the hardest versions of each type of game. IMO I would rather have 3 easy games and 1 mauve Dinos than 4 games that are all relatively tough.

I think the best thing you could do is get to the point where you are breezing through games 1 and 2. At this point in LG I am finishing the 2 easiest games somewhere around 14 minutes, and then the 3rd game takes about 8-9 minutes, which leaves me around 12 min for the hardest game. At that pace it would take a truly brutal game to trip me up (keep in mind if there is 1 truly brutal game, chances are the first 3 were easier than normal, so I probably did them faster than normal.

TL;DR just like it is key to get though the first 10 LR in about 11 minutes, it's also key to get through the easy LG games quickly. Aiming for 8:30 per game is going to hurt you because the most difficult games will take longer.

57 lg was so damn difficult not just because of dinos, but because game 4 was ridiculously long... not difficult, but there was no spare space to diagram, it was mostly brute force, etc. i dunno how well i wouldve handled a 3/4 combo like that on a real test.

I'm wondering if the past few tests are the start of a new trend. I think from PT 68-70, game 3 has been hardest game, but game 4 has been most time consuming. Games 1-2 are generally easier than normal. Thoughts?

blackbirdfly wrote:I took about 5 killer games today (Zephyr, Old/Used CDs, etc...) and they really discouraged me. Most of them took me more than 15 minutes I really hope the era of killer LGs are over. I wouldn't be able to handle one in December.

Is there a specific type of game that was constantly tripping you up? Or just the hardest versions of each type of game. IMO I would rather have 3 easy games and 1 mauve Dinos than 4 games that are all relatively tough.

I think the best thing you could do is get to the point where you are breezing through games 1 and 2. At this point in LG I am finishing the 2 easiest games somewhere around 14 minutes, and then the 3rd game takes about 8-9 minutes, which leaves me around 12 min for the hardest game. At that pace it would take a truly brutal game to trip me up (keep in mind if there is 1 truly brutal game, chances are the first 3 were easier than normal, so I probably did them faster than normal.

TL;DR just like it is key to get though the first 10 LR in about 11 minutes, it's also key to get through the easy LG games quickly. Aiming for 8:30 per game is going to hurt you because the most difficult games will take longer.

57 lg was so damn difficult not just because of dinos, but because game 4 was ridiculously long... not difficult, but there was no spare space to diagram, it was mostly brute force, etc. i dunno how well i wouldve handled a 3/4 combo like that on a real test.

Completely agree actually. PT 57 LG damn near made me cry. Granted it was very early in my studies. What I meant was that I would rather have 1 very difficult game (like mauve dinos) and then 3 easy than a section where each game was slightly harder than the normal difficulty for that question. The last thing I want is a really really hard game AND a tougher games. Thankfully the recent trend does seem to suggest that we are getting more difficult LR and RC while games are easier. Even though to b honest, I'd take a hard LG with an easy RC over hard RC easy LG any day

blackbirdfly wrote:I took about 5 killer games today (Zephyr, Old/Used CDs, etc...) and they really discouraged me. Most of them took me more than 15 minutes I really hope the era of killer LGs are over. I wouldn't be able to handle one in December.

Is there a specific type of game that was constantly tripping you up? Or just the hardest versions of each type of game. IMO I would rather have 3 easy games and 1 mauve Dinos than 4 games that are all relatively tough.

I think the best thing you could do is get to the point where you are breezing through games 1 and 2. At this point in LG I am finishing the 2 easiest games somewhere around 14 minutes, and then the 3rd game takes about 8-9 minutes, which leaves me around 12 min for the hardest game. At that pace it would take a truly brutal game to trip me up (keep in mind if there is 1 truly brutal game, chances are the first 3 were easier than normal, so I probably did them faster than normal.

TL;DR just like it is key to get though the first 10 LR in about 11 minutes, it's also key to get through the easy LG games quickly. Aiming for 8:30 per game is going to hurt you because the most difficult games will take longer.

57 lg was so damn difficult not just because of dinos, but because game 4 was ridiculously long... not difficult, but there was no spare space to diagram, it was mostly brute force, etc. i dunno how well i wouldve handled a 3/4 combo like that on a real test.

I'm wondering if the past few tests are the start of a new trend. I think from PT 68-70, game 3 has been hardest game, but game 4 has been most time consuming. Games 1-2 are generally easier than normal. Thoughts?

On 70 1, 2, & 4 were ridiculously easy (5-6 minutes each). Game 3 was a little tricky to set-up initially, but once you got the set-up everything fell into place pretty easily.

IMO, it seems like the LG sections in general are getting a little easier

Thorcogan wrote:Is there a specific type of game that was constantly tripping you up? Or just the hardest versions of each type of game. IMO I would rather have 3 easy games and 1 mauve Dinos than 4 games that are all relatively tough.

I think the best thing you could do is get to the point where you are breezing through games 1 and 2. At this point in LG I am finishing the 2 easiest games somewhere around 14 minutes, and then the 3rd game takes about 8-9 minutes, which leaves me around 12 min for the hardest game. At that pace it would take a truly brutal game to trip me up (keep in mind if there is 1 truly brutal game, chances are the first 3 were easier than normal, so I probably did them faster than normal.

TL;DR just like it is key to get though the first 10 LR in about 11 minutes, it's also key to get through the easy LG games quickly. Aiming for 8:30 per game is going to hurt you because the most difficult games will take longer.

57 lg was so damn difficult not just because of dinos, but because game 4 was ridiculously long... not difficult, but there was no spare space to diagram, it was mostly brute force, etc. i dunno how well i wouldve handled a 3/4 combo like that on a real test.

I'm wondering if the past few tests are the start of a new trend. I think from PT 68-70, game 3 has been hardest game, but game 4 has been most time consuming. Games 1-2 are generally easier than normal. Thoughts?

On 70 1, 2, & 4 were ridiculously easy (5-6 minutes each). Game 3 was a little tricky to set-up initially, but once you got the set-up everything fell into place pretty easily.

IMO, it seems like the LG sections in general are getting a little easier

On the original test I took my sweet time, was 100% sure everything was right, and was on to the last question of game 4 and had 3 minutes left. It was a conditional question, so I even had time to plug in each answer choice.... Somehow got it wrong for a -1 on LG. I firmly believe something was just off about that day. Ugh.

It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

vicpin5190 wrote:It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

As someone who heavily favors LGs, I'm not sure how I feel.

Same boat as you. Think of it this way. Since we are good at LG, it should pretty much be an automatic -0/-1. So that's good.

vicpin5190 wrote:It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

As someone who heavily favors LGs, I'm not sure how I feel.

Same boat as you. Think of it this way. Since we are good at LG, it should pretty much be an automatic -0/-1. So that's good.

I've found that I'm my own worst enemy at LGs now. It's gotten so automatic to the point that I actually become too confident in my ability and will lose stupid points because I rushed through easy ones. At least the last 2 tests, I've scooted through the easy problems in under 4 minutes but then I go back and the errors I make are there because I got cocky (PT 65 games 1 and 2, for example, I went -2 solely because of clear carelessness). It's a blessing and a curse. But I'm hoping to go -0 on games on the actual test, it'll give me a little more padding on the other 3 sections, though I'm hoping I won't need it at this point...

vicpin5190 wrote:It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

As someone who heavily favors LGs, I'm not sure how I feel.

Same boat as you. Think of it this way. Since we are good at LG, it should pretty much be an automatic -0/-1. So that's good.

Or -0/-1 would still have been automatic even if the LG sections didn't get easier and possibly even got harder. In this case, LR and RC getting more difficult with no gain in points from LG would actually hurt.

vicpin5190 wrote:It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

As someone who heavily favors LGs, I'm not sure how I feel.

Same boat as you. Think of it this way. Since we are good at LG, it should pretty much be an automatic -0/-1. So that's good.

I've found that I'm my own worst enemy at LGs now. It's gotten so automatic to the point that I actually become too confident in my ability and will lose stupid points because I rushed through easy ones. At least the last 2 tests, I've scooted through the easy problems in under 4 minutes but then I go back and the errors I make are there because I got cocky (PT 65 games 1 and 2, for example, I went -2 solely because of clear carelessness). It's a blessing and a curse. But I'm hoping to go -0 on games on the actual test, it'll give me a little more padding on the other 3 sections, though I'm hoping I won't need it at this point...

There is no need to be doing any game in 4 minutes. Seriously lol that's madness. U could easily slow your pace and still be way ahead on time. That's what I would suggest in order to cut down on the sloppiness. The only type of game I could think of where I could do it at that speed would be an ordering game with a monster block that forced only 2 possible scenarios.

But hey, if ur so good at the games that you can do it so fast that it's almost too fast, you are in a good place

Otunga wrote:I've been PTing in a library in a study room, staring ahead at a blank wall anytime I glance up. In addition, I've only been drinking water just before the test and after section three. I feel slightly dehydrated for much of the test, but this is exactly how I felt in Oct. Is anyone else trying to get their PT conditions like this? At least for me, not being able to drink anything during the test is constraining. But of course...they can't have people drinking stuff throughout due to considerations like forms getting ruined and everybody having to go to the bathroom (or so I speculate). I'm still considering synchro or perhaps something similar to it. Any suggestions? Coffee/tea's out because it makes me go to the bathroom too much.

I was frustrated/worried about the water thing too because I drink an abnormal amount of water. I'm assuming your prior test center didn't let you do this, but my proctors (who were otherwise fairly by-the-book) let us have our water bottles on the floor next to us and we were allowed to drink from them during the test. You have no idea how relieved I was when they told us that.

I would order Synchro ASAP if you're wanting to use it on test day so you can play around with how it makes you feel/how it affects performance on PTs. IMO, it would not substitute for any kind of hydrating liquid (water, tea). Drinking it makes me need water immediately afterward-no matter how you mix it, I don't think it's going to quench your thirst.

Otunga wrote:I've been PTing in a library in a study room, staring ahead at a blank wall anytime I glance up. In addition, I've only been drinking water just before the test and after section three. I feel slightly dehydrated for much of the test, but this is exactly how I felt in Oct. Is anyone else trying to get their PT conditions like this? At least for me, not being able to drink anything during the test is constraining. But of course...they can't have people drinking stuff throughout due to considerations like forms getting ruined and everybody having to go to the bathroom (or so I speculate). I'm still considering synchro or perhaps something similar to it. Any suggestions? Coffee/tea's out because it makes me go to the bathroom too much.

I was frustrated/worried about the water thing too because I drink an abnormal amount of water. I'm assuming your prior test center didn't let you do this, but my proctors (who were otherwise fairly by-the-book) let us have our water bottles on the floor next to us and we were allowed to drink from them during the test. You have no idea how relieved I was when they told us that.

I would order Synchro ASAP if you're wanting to use it on test day so you can play around with how it makes you feel/how it affects performance on PTs. IMO, it would not substitute for any kind of hydrating liquid (water, tea). Drinking it makes me need water immediately afterward-no matter how you mix it, I don't think it's going to quench your thirst.

Ah, that's awesome! My proctors were by-the-book and nothing was on anyone's desk. (It wouldn't have fit on the shoulder-desks in any case.)

Good point about the synchro. I think I should try to use the water bottle during the test, no matter what I do, if there's a chance.

vicpin5190 wrote:It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

As someone who heavily favors LGs, I'm not sure how I feel.

Same boat as you. Think of it this way. Since we are good at LG, it should pretty much be an automatic -0/-1. So that's good.

Or -0/-1 would still have been automatic even if the LG sections didn't get easier and possibly even got harder. In this case, LR and RC getting more difficult with no gain in points from LG would actually hurt.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

Unforunately you are right though I just choose to ignore that because dwelling on it is useless

vicpin5190 wrote:It sounds like, just reading some of these posts that 3 trends are taking place (correct me if I'm off base):

1) LG has eased up ever so slightly heading into the 70s2) LR's are getting trickier, wordier, and overall the difficulty is a little bit more up than in previous years3) RC is easing up some, but still closer to the difficulty seen in the 60s than in the 50/40/30s, etc.

As someone who heavily favors LGs, I'm not sure how I feel.

Same boat as you. Think of it this way. Since we are good at LG, it should pretty much be an automatic -0/-1. So that's good.

Or -0/-1 would still have been automatic even if the LG sections didn't get easier and possibly even got harder. In this case, LR and RC getting more difficult with no gain in points from LG would actually hurt.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

Unforunately you are right though I just choose to ignore that because dwelling on it is useless

I'd much rather LR stays the same, LG gets a little harder, and RC eases up than the opposites on each.